# Rant / Commentary: Smoking + Movies = Poor Box Office + “R” Rating?



## Nurse_Maduro (Oct 23, 2008)

Yesterday, Scientific American posted an online article stating that "An analysis of top-grossing movies from the last decade shows that films with smoking make less money." It also reports that the Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education (CTCRE) at the University of California, San Francisco finds that result to be sufficient reason to slap any film depicting tobacco usage with a "R" rating. It's not the only one: Last month, the World Health Organization called for world-wide adult ratings on all films depicting tobacco usage.

I can't possibly be the only to to see how ridiculous a notion that is.
First, an all-inclusive statement such as "films with smoking make less money" is about as useful as saying "all heavy children eat at McDonald's." Certainly some do, possibly over half of them do, but not _all_ of them do. Should we pass a law banning all children from McDonald's until they reach 18 years of age?

And if we're really going to start nit-picking, then let's go all the way and admit that the highest two grossing films worldwide, _Avatar_ and _Titanic_, both feature tobacco usage. Of course, there's no mention of that by the CTCRE, is there? Frankly, I'm surprised; that statistic could easily be spun to their advantage, as neither film carries an "R" rating.

Third, who is monitoring the depiction of alcohol consumption in films? Certainly, Disney's 1937 animated film _Snow White and the Seven Dwarves_ features as much drinking as its 1961 film _101 Dalmations_ shows tobacco consumption. But then, who can think of Cruella Deville without her iconic cigarette holder?

The article also questions what benefit having characters smoke can have on a film if making that choice dooms the film to a lower profit margin. Cruella certainly answers that question, as do Sharon Stone in _Basic Instinct_, Stephen Dorff's evil vampire Deacon Frost in _Blade_, and Lex Luthor from _Superman_. Do you see the pattern yet? Yes, there are characters like _The A-Team_'s Hannibal and _X-Men_'s Wolverine but, for the most part, it's the villains who smoke. For every Sherlock Holmes,there are _two_ Tony Montanas. Even in_ Face-Off_, which features John Travolta and Nicholas cage in dual roles as both hero and villain, it's _only_ when the bad guy appears that the smoke starts flying (and massive explosions, but I digress). Do we really think our children to be so unintelligent that they won't get the not-so-subtle message that smoking is what the _bad_ people do?

Look, I'm not saying there should be smoking in every cartoon, nor that it shouldn't be monitored. I'm simply saying that the knee-jerk reaction of classifying every film that shows so much as a cigarette butt laying on a kitchen table to an "R" rating is as unnecessary as banning the Mirriam-Webster Dictionary from schools because it contains the phrase "oral sex." Yes, that_ really_ happened.

I'm all for "It takes a village to raise a child," but what happened to educating your child at home? Teaching them right from wrong? Teaching them moderation and responsibility? This generation has given many of our rights away, and every day we lose a bit more freedom. Are we willing to give away future generations' right to choose as well? It may sound as if I'm being melodramatic. but every single step is one step _closer_.

Additional sources:
Wikipedia: List of highest-grossing films
WHO Publication: "Smoke-free movies: From Evidence To Action"
The Independent: "The burning issue: only villains smoke in Hollywood"
Emax Health: "Movie Villains Smoke More Than Heroes"

(from Cigar Hell)

========================

What say _you_?


----------

